Island of Las Palmas Case (US v.
Netherlands) (1928) a part of two of the native States of the Island of Sangi from 1648
FACTS:
An award of the tribunal of arbitration was rendered in conformity
with the special agreement concluded on January 23, 1925, between
the United States of America and the Netherlands relating to the
arbitration of differences respecting sovereignty over the Island of
Palmas. The arbitrator was Max Huber. Netherlands and USA
presented evidences of sovereignty over the Island of Palmas.
The US contends that the Island of Palmas is part of the Philippines
territory, which was ceded by Spain to the US in lieu of the Treaty of
Peace. The US bases its title on discovery. This is confirmed not only
by cartographers but also by the Treaty of Munster, to which Spain
and the Netherlands are contracting parties. The title was intact at
the moment when Spain ceded the Philippines to US due to the
Treaty of Peace. The Island of Palmas lies within the lines traced by
the Treaty of Peace. Furthermore, the US maintains that Palmas
forms a geographical part of the Philippine Islands and in virtue of
the principle of contiguity, belongs to the power having sovereignty
over the Philippines.
Netherlands contends that the fact of discovery by Spain was not
proved. Though Spain had any title, such title had been lost through
acquiescence, as the sovereignty was not openly exercised. Thus,
the principle of contiguity is contested.
The Netherlands, represented by the East India Company, have
possessed and exercised rights to sovereignty from 1677, or probably
from a date prior even to 1648, to the present day. It arose out of
conventions entered into with native princes of the Island of Sangi
(the main island of the Talautse Isles), establishing the suzerainty of
the Netherlands over the territories of these princes, including
Palmas. The state of affairs was claimed to be validated by
international treaties.
ISSUES + RULING:
W/N the Netherlands can claim sovereignty on the title of peaceful and
continuous display of State authority. YES.
The title of peaceful and continuous display of State authority
prevails over a title of acquisition of sovereignty not followed by
actual display of State authority. The Netherlands has succeeded in
establishing display of State authority since the Island of Palmas was
onwards. The native States were connected with the East India
Company, and thereby with the Netherlands, by contracts of
suzerainty, which conferred upon the suzerain powers that would
justify Palmas as part of his territory. Contracts of suzerainty created
between a State and the native princes or chiefs of peoples create a
form of internal organization of a colonial territory. The system of
contracts of suzerainty was expressly approved by the Treaty of
Munster.
No proof was presented that any other Power established any act of
Sovereignty over Palmas. The display of sovereignty was open and
public. No obligation for the Netherlands to notify other Powers of
the establishment of suzerainty.
The Treaty of Utrecht recognized the state of things in 1714 and
therefore, affirmed the suzerain right of Netherlands over Palmas.
W/N US can claim sovereignty over the Island of Palmas by way of cession
under the Treaty of Paris. NO.
The Treaty does not create any title of sovereignty for the US which
was not already vested in Spain. Thus, it is important to determine if
Spain had sovereignty over Palmas at the time of the coming into
force of the Treaty of Paris. The US based their claim on the titles of
discovery, recognition by treaty and of contiguity.
The title of discovery by Spain exists only as an inchoate title.
Applying intertemporal law, the view since the 19th century that an
inchoate title of discovery must be completed within a reasonable
period by the effective occupation of the region claimed to be
discovered was followed. However, Spain has not established that
sovereignty was displayed at any time. An inchoate title cannot
prevail over a definite title founded on continuous and peaceful
display of sovereignty. The reports on record concerning the
discovery of Palmas state that the Island was seen. No mention was
made of landing or contact with the natives. Allegations of
commercial relations between Palmas and Mindanao were made.
However, there is no official document mentioning the Island of
Palmas as belonging to an administrative or judicial district in the
Philippines.
The proof of US showing the maps created by cartographers prove
to be inaccurate.
 The title of contiguity, on the other hand, has no foundation in created a right to the law in force at the time the right arises
international law. The principle is in conflict to what was said as to demands that the existence of the right shall follow conditions
territorial sovereignty and as to the necessary relation between the required by the evolution of law. The 16th century view follows that
right to exclude the other States from a region and the duty to it is enough to see a territory to establish sovereignty. The 19th
display therein the activities of the State. It is not an appropriate century view laid down the principle that effective occupation is
method in deciding conflicts in territorial sovereignty as it lacks necessary to claim territorial sovereignty following an inchoate title
precision and would lead to arbitrary results. of discovery. In the case, it was followed that discovery alone
The title of recognition by treaty does not apply even if the Island is without subsequent act is not enough to establish sovereignty over
considered to be held and possessed by Spain in 1648 since the the territory. This is because there was a principle laid down in the
rights would have been derived from the Treaty of Munster which 18th century that occupation, to constitute a claim to territorial
would have been superseded by the Treaty of Utrecht. The Treaty of sovereignty, must be effective. It means that there are certain
Utrecht recognized the state of things in 1714 and therefore, guarantees offered to other States and their nationals. It is
affirmed the suzerain right of Netherlands over Palmas. Even if the incompatible with this principle that there are regions which are not
Treaty of Utrecht was not to be considered, the acquiescence of under the effective sovereignty of a state but which are reserved for
Spain of the situation created after 1677 would deprive her of their exclusive influence in virtue of solely a title of acquisition. Thus,
invoking rights at the present time. the 19th century view prevailed over the 16th century view.
Sovereignty in relation to a portion of the surface of the globe is the
legal condition necessary for the inclusion of such portion in the DISPOSITION: The Island of Palmas forms in its entirety a part of the
territory of any particular State. Sovereignty in the relations Netherlands territory.
between states signifies independence. If disputes arise as to the
sovereignty over a portion of territory, it is customary to examine
which of the States claiming sovereignty posses a title superior to
that which the other State might possibly bring forward against. If
the contestation is based on the fact that one party has actually
displayed sovereignty, it is not sufficient that a title was acquired at
a certain moment. It must also be shows that the territorial
sovereignty has continued to exist and did exist at the moment
which for the decision of the dispute must be considered as critical.
In the case at bar, it must be established that the territorial
sovereignty existed prior to the Treaty of Paris (1898).
International law has the object of assuring the coexistence of
different interests which are worthy of legal protection. The interest
which involves the maintenance of a state of things having been
offered at the critical time to the inhabitants of the disputed territory
and other States a certain guarantee for the respect of their rights
ought to prevail over an interest which has not yet produced any
form of development.
Intertemporal law is rules which determine which of successive legal
systems is to be applied to the case. It follows that the act that